As the demand for high bandwidth, high bit rate communications increases (e.g., to accommodate multimedia applications, in particular), fiber optics technology is rapidly advancing to supply the capacity. SONET (i.e., Synchronous Optical Network) is the communication hierarchy that has been specified by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) as a standard for a high-speed digital hierarchy for optical fiber. SONET defines optical carrier (OC) levels and electrically equivalent synchronous transport signals (STSs) for the fiber-optic based transmission hierarchy. The SONET standard is described in more detail in ANSI T1.105 and T1.106, and in Bellcore Telecordia Generic Requirements GR-253-CORE and GR-499-CORE, which are incorporated herein by reference.
Before SONET, fiber optic systems in the public telephone network used proprietary architectures, equipment, line codes, multiplexing formats and maintenance procedures. The users of this equipment (e.g., Regional Bell Operating Companies and inter-exchange carriers (IXCs) in the United States, Canada, Korea, and Taiwan, among other countries) desired standards such as SONET so they could employ equipment from different suppliers without experiencing incompatibility problems.
SONET defines a technology for carrying many signals of different capacities through a synchronous, flexible, optical hierarchy using a byte-interleaved multiplexing scheme to simplify multiplexing and provide end-to-end network management. The base signal in SONET is a Synchronous Transport Signal level-1 (STS-1) which operates at 51.84 Megabits per second (Mbps). Higher-level SONET signals are summarized in the following table:
TABLE 1SONET HierarchySignalBit RateCapacitySTS-1, OC-1 51.840 Mb/s  28 DS1s or 1 DS3STS-3, OC-3 155.520 Mb/s  84 DS1s or 3 DS3sSTS-12, OC-12 622.080 Mb/s 336 DS1s or 12 DS3sSTS-48, OC-482488.320 Mb/s 1344 DS1s or 48 DS3sSTS-192, OC-1929953.280 Mb/s 5376 DS1s or 192 DS3sSTS-768, OC-76839813.12 Mb/s21504 DS1s or 768 DS3s
Thus, each SONET STS-N electrical signal has a corresponding OC-N optical signal. The OC-N signals are created by converting the STS-N electrical signal to an optical signal. The SONET standard establishes a multiplexing format for using any number of 51.84 Mbps signals as building blocks. For example, an OC-3 (Optical Carrier, Level 3) is a 155.52 Mbps signal (i.e., 3 times 51.84 Mbps), and its electrical signal counterpart is referred to as an STS-3 signal. The STS-1 signal carries a DS3 signal or a number of DS1 or other lower level signals. A SONET STS-3 signal is created by concatenating STS-1 signals.
Telecommunication equipment at central offices (COs), remote terminals (RTs), wireless communication cell sites and other equipment locations is frequently deployed as one or more bays with multiple shelves, wherein each shelf is configured to receive a plurality of communications cards. A backplane is provided in each bay for communication between its cards and shelves, as well as for interbay communication. One of the more common types of equipment to be found at these equipment sites is SONET multiplex equipment which takes lower-rate (tributary) signals, such as DS1 (1.5 Mbps), DS3 (45 Mbps), OC-1 (51.84 Mbps), or OC-3 (155.52 Mbps), and time division multiplexes them into a higher-rate signal such as OC-3 or OC-12 (622.08 Mbps). The SONET multiplex equipment also performs the corresponding demultiplex function of recovering the lower rate tributary signals from an incoming higher-rate signal.
Telecommunications companies are eager to provide as much performance as possible from their existing infrastructure. Their telecommunications systems are primarily based on the DS1 electrical signal hierarchy that uses DS0 data. A DS1 signal is comprised of 24 multiplexed DS0 voice channels. To provide capacity that meets the afore-mentioned demand for more bandwidth and high bit rates, telecommunications companies need equipment that is based on a higher data rate such as DS3 in which DS1 signals are the base signal for data channel multiplexing, as opposed to DS0 signals.
Problems with existing equipment managing DS3 traffic, however, are numerous. For example, DS3 hierarchy-based equipment requires more bay and shelf space in CO, RT, cell sites and other locations where equipment space is already a limited commodity, where bays and shelves are already crowded (e.g., many shelf card slots are filled with a card), and where room to add equipment with new features is very limited or essentially nonexistent.
In addition, previous generations of SONET and asynchronous multiplex equipment have dedicated fixed portions of an equipment shelf to different types/rates of services. For example, separate portions of the shelf are typically reserved for DS1, DS3, and OC3 interface units. Dedicating specific portions of the shelf to specific service types reduces the flexibility of the shelf, and typically leaves wasted shelf space for any given application.
Also, access to the optical connectors on existing multiplexer cards is typically on the front of a card, while access to the electrical connectors is on the back of the shelf. In equipment locations were space is limited, it can be difficult for human operators to gain access to the backs of card slots in a shelf of an equipment bay. A need therefore exists for SONET multiplexer equipment having a reduced form factor, with nondedicated card slots, and with front panel access to both electrical connectors and optical connectors.
To illustrate these disadvantages of existing SONET multiplex equipment, reference will now be made to FIG. 1 which illustrates a Fujitsu SONET multiplexer 10 (i.e., model FLM-150). The Fujitsu Multiplexer 10 requires an entire shelf in a communications bay and dedicated card slots. For example, several cards are needed for DS1 to DS3 multiplexing, several cards are needed for DS3 to OC3 processing, and so on. Thus, a need exists for a SONET multiplexer having at least standard functionality, yet requiring less equipment space.
The Fujitsu Multiplexer 10 is not easily set up or provisioned. The Fujitsu Multiplexer 10 is designed to be everything to everyone in the optical communications environment. Since it is not designed to be compatible with any one particular system, it provides hundreds of choices to the user and must be substantially configured by a user operating a provisioning application on a computer (e.g., a personal computer or PC) before it can even run data through it. The installation, set up and provisioning manual for the Fujitsu Multiplexer 10 is long and considerable training is needed for the user to be able to configure and operate the unit. Further, after such a lengthy and involved configuration phase, the unit may not be subsequently reprovisioned to accommodate a change in the configured data paths. This aspect of the Fujitsu Multiplexer 10 renders its use very cumbersome. Thus, a need exists for SONET multiplexing equipment that requires minimal set up and provisioning, and minimal or no user training. Further, a need exists for SONET multiplexing equipment that does not require connecting the equipment to a computer for provisioning, and that automates much of the provisioning process to simplify it for the user. In addition, a need exists for SONET multiplexing equipment that simplifies provisioning to allow reconfiguration of the equipment for flexible use.
Also, to use the Fujitsu Multiplexer 10 in different applications such as a drop or drop and continue (e.g., ring) application requires more units, which increases cost, and requires more set up and provisioning. A need exists for a SONET multiplexer that can be deployed in different applications with greater functionality, little or no provisioning, and a minimal number of units to minimize cost and malfunctions due, for example, to failed electronics. For example, if four Fujitsu Multiplexers units were to be deployed in a ring configuration, such as that depicted in FIG. 5 and described below, three of the Fujitsu Multiplexers would require substantial provisioning to instruct each of these units regarding which data paths are being dropped and continued and how to cross-connect at each node, as well as alarm conditions, among other configuration data. Thus, a need exists for SONET multiplexing equipment that simplifies provisioning to allow configuration of the equipment for flexible use in different applications.
Providing redundancy of optical paths can present a problem where there is limited equipment space since additional circuit packs are used in conventional SONET multiplexers. Reference is now made to FIG. 2, which depicts another existing SONET multiplexer that is available from Adtran, Inc. The Adtran SONET multiplexer is the Total Access OPTI-3 model which converts OC3 to three DS3s and consists of a rack-mounted shelf device.
SONET multiplexers generally provide redundancy of data paths to enable continued transmission of data after an optical path failure. With continued reference to FIG. 2, a conventional SONET system 12 employs plural multiplexers 20, 20′ and 22, 22′ at each of the nodes 14 (e.g. a central office) and 16 (e.g. a remote terminal or customer premise), respectively. A path 18 is selected as the primary path and a secondary path 18, is used in the event of primary path failure. In a 1:n redundancy system, wherein n is an integer, n paths are available and n−1 paths are used with the remaining path being a spare. A 1:n system requires communication between the multiplexers to establish which path(s) are in use and which path(s) are reserved for use following a path failure. In a 1+1 redundancy system, the path is selected based on whichever of the two paths is working and no communication between the multiplexers regarding the selected redundant path is required.
Configuring a SONET system with redundancy using the Adtran multiplexer requires at least four multiplexers 20, 20′, 22, 22′ (i.e., two per node for two optical paths between the nodes). This redundant configuration is disadvantageous over a system having only a single optical path between two multiplexers, and therefore no redundancy, because it requires twice the equipment space and twice the cost for the extra two multiplexers. Further, the redundant system is less reliable in terms of the increased likelihood for electronics failure or equipment failure from heat, for example, due to the additional multiplexer electronics. A need exists for a SONET multiplexer that provides redundancy while minimizing equipment space and cost and maximizing reliability.